Multi-screen Viewership Boosts TV Fandom and Loyalty, According to Viacom’s “Getting With the Program: TV’s Funnels, Paths and Hurdles”

New Research Explores How Audiences Discover, Trial and Watch TV Shows

NEW YORK–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Viacom (NASDAQ: VIAB, VIA) today unveiled the results of “Getting With the Program: TV’s Funnels, Paths and Hurdles,” a new study exploring how audiences discover, watch and become fans of TV shows. The findings reveal that the proliferation of devices and sources is having a positive impact on viewership and fandom. Additionally, multi-screen viewers (those who used multiple screens and sources) demonstrate a preference for live TV and stronger network loyalty compared to single-screeners (those who only used one screen).

The study involved in-person interviews in Boston and Chicago and online surveys of more than 1,500 U.S. Viacom viewers ages 13-44. The online survey included digital diaries on TV viewing paths, for which respondents listed up to 10 TV programs in the order they watched them “yesterday,” and logged more than 7,000 shows.

“The goal of our research was to uncover the often complex paths audiences take to discovering and becoming fans of our content,” said Colleen Fahey Rush, Executive Vice President and Chief Research Officer, Viacom Media Networks. “What we’re seeing is that the myriad of sources and devices has taken fandom to new heights, making TV a bigger part of our audiences’ lives than ever before.”

The study shows that, compared to a few years ago, a vast majority (79%) of viewers say having more ways of accessing shows helps them try more programs and 78% wouldn’t have become fans of some shows if they couldn’t watch in multiple ways. Multi-screen viewership is also connected to a stronger preference for live TV and network loyalty:

47% of multi-screeners say it’s important to watch their favorite shows live, versus 23% of single-screeners;

45% of multi-screeners are loyal to a few networks, versus 28% of single-screeners; and

45% of multi-screeners wouldn’t give up pay TV because they rely on DVR, versus 22% of single-screeners.

Funnels to Fandom

The process of becoming a fan occurs over the course of a five-stage process, or a TV viewing funnel. The journey starts with discovery of a show, followed by research, selection, fandom and ultimately sharing.

Discovery: in-person word of mouth is the #1 source for show discovery at 90%, closely followed by TV promos at 85% and word of mouth online or via social media at 78%.

Research: once aware of a show, viewers usually watch an episode to find out more (55%), check when it airs next (42%) or discuss with friends or family (35%). Nearly a quarter usually discuss the show online and via social media.

Selection: when deciding what device or source to trial a TV show on, live TV is the most popular source (57%), followed by streaming (22%), DVR (10%) and VOD (6%).

Fandom: once a viewer becomes a fan, they first want to know when the show airs on TV (61%), whether it is live (52%) and whether it is in-season or not (48%). When they’ve decided to continue watching, 53% watch on live TV.

Among fans, marathoning is popular across all age groups: 83% of Millennials say this is one of their favorite ways to watch, followed by 72% of Gen Xers and 65% of Digital Natives.

Sharing: 61% of viewers recommend a show to others in-person, while 38% invite others to co-view. Among Digital Natives (ages 13-17), invitations to co-view are most prevalent at 47%, followed by Millennials (ages 18-34) at 40% and Gen Xers (ages 35-44) at 29%.

TVs are the most-used device for show discovery and fandom, while computers are most used for research. Live TV is the most-used source for show trial and continuing to watch a show.

Within the TV viewing funnel, audiences are dedicating more time to the discovery and research stages, which is driving greater fandom and sharing. Compared to a few years ago:

73% become interested in new shows more quickly;

50% spend more time researching shows before watching;

81% watch a greater variety of shows;

83% are fans of more shows at the same time; and

61% agree that TV is a bigger part of their social life.

Paths to Viewing

Drawing on data from the digital diaries, the study explores the different ways viewers watch TV programs, or their viewing path. While the growing number of devices and sources makes watching TV more complicated, it also promotes viewing.

Gen Xers show a heavy reliance on live TV: 45% only watch live TV and 80% watch live TV at any point in a given viewing path.

While Millennials tend to stream more than Gen Xers, they still rely on live TV: 33% only watch live TV and 66% watch live TV at any point in a given viewing path.

Digital Natives rely on a mix of streaming and live TV: 45% only watch live TV and 70% watch live TV at any point in a given viewing path.

Hurdles, Encountered and Overcome

There are a number of hurdles viewers encounter when looking for specific TV shows. The most common is not having access to the latest episode (79%), followed by not being able to find the show on TV (77%).

Audiences turn to alternate devices and sources to overcome these hurdles. For example, when a viewer cannot find their show on TV, they usually watch something else on live TV, DVR or VOD. If they are looking for the same show, they first go to network/show apps or sites, followed by download-to-own sources like iTunes or Amazon. Viewers ranked “deciding not to watch TV” as the least likely solution for each hurdle.

“Our fans are very driven and solution-oriented when it comes to finding their favorite shows,” continued Rush. “We want to encourage that fandom by making content available whenever, wherever our audiences’ TV viewing paths take them. Understanding these paths will help us leverage multiplatform opportunities even more strategically.”

The Future of TV is Bright

Viewers are very positive about TV’s future when asked to look ahead five years.

84% agree that they will have more options for where, how and what to watch.

]]>http://latd.com/2014/09/23/getting-with-the-program-tvs-funnels-paths-and-hurdles-a-viacom-study-with-latitude/feed/0Crowdsourced Storytelling: How Can You Make the Most of User-Generated Content?http://latd.com/2014/03/06/crowdsourced-storytelling-how-can-you-make-the-most-of-user-generated-content/
http://latd.com/2014/03/06/crowdsourced-storytelling-how-can-you-make-the-most-of-user-generated-content/#commentsThu, 06 Mar 2014 21:50:44 +0000Kim Gaskinshttp://latd.com/?p=11880Continue reading →]]>This article was originally published on The Guardian.

When it comes to storytelling, there’s no question that asking “the crowd” for funds, information or content itself has proven successful in many cases. The GuardianWitness platform has allowed citizens to become important news sources; AirBnB is creating its second crowdsourced video to showcase users’ passion for their cities; and Veronica Mars is on the way to the silver screen with more than $5.7 million fan dollars through Kickstarter.

Inclusive storytelling can be hugely rewarding, but understanding how to hook your audience—and how to walk away with high-quality content—can be just as difficult. With that in mind, here are a few best practices for engaging people in various aspects of storytelling, including funding and content creation.

Connect with people on an emotional level. This may sound obvious, but there are countless ways to frame a particular project or issue to people you’re hoping to entice—so make sure to think like a good marketer. For example, Israel Mirsky is the founder of Uncoverage, a crowd-funding platform for investigative journalism, who has decided to focus his message on the issues that are most emotionally accessible to his audience. There’s a compelling business case backing Mirsky’s efforts; namely, there’s no longer any business model to support important but resource-intensive journalism that may bring in fewer advertising dollars than simple, click-worthy headlines. It’s a powerful argument, but it’s not the one Mirsky is taking to potential contributors: “I suspect that talking about the problem with investigative journalism isn’t the right value proposition to bring to the table here. The right one is the one that individuals care about: the people and the issues that matter to them.”

In a similar vein, a recent study by we at Latitude asked people what they would want in exchange for funding or participating in group storytelling; more people (43%) were interested in ensuring the story had a positive social message than in receiving ownership in the idea, acknowledgment, or special merchandise. (See infographic below.)

Cultivate trust through transparency. When asking people to submit content of their own, it’s critical to provide all the necessary context—including how, where, and by whom the content is going to be used. Many potential contributors will already have these questions on their minds, so you’ll appear more trustworthy if you’re forthcoming about this information.

Once you’ve offered up the instructions, don’t stop there; allow your community to ask questions and run ideas by you. This will demonstrate that you value their time (since they won’t be wasting it creating something off-topic), and you’ll be more likely to end up with submissions that meet your needs.

Offer the right balance of incentives. This will vary considerably depending on your project and your community. When asking people to submit creative work, it’s best to balance intrinsic and extrinsic motivational drivers.

Wil Merritt is the CEO of Zooppa, a platform that enables crowdsourcing and content development between brands and agencies and creative people. For each project, Zooppa distributes a creative brief to its global community of more than 225,000 members. Briefs promise monetary incentives—usually in a contest format—but often attract people who are passionate about the specific topic of the brief. “Even if [a brand] puts up a huge amount of money for a project, people won’t do it if it’s uninteresting to them. There has to be more to it than that,” says Merritt. On the other hand, offering a financial reward demonstrates respect for people’s time. It’s a kind of pre-requisite, even if money isn’t the primary motivator.

Impose constraints to rev up creativity. When asking people to perform a task (especially content creation), make sure your instructions are completely clear. While too much clarity seems like it might stifle creativity, that’s not the case. “The tighter the brief, the more creative the work is,” says Merritt. “Creative people like having certain constraints to work within—it really lets their ideas flow.”

On the other hand, if your objective is to capture a lot of storytelling or to build up a content library, not create one specific deliverable (like a short film or a commercial), then keeping things more open-ended may be the way to go.

Interested to learn more about collaborating with “the crowd”? Latitude’s The Future of Storytelling study focused on the audience’s perspective, asking more than 1100 people around the world how they’d like to participate in storytelling, what they’d be willing to contribute, and what they’d hope to receive in return.

]]>http://latd.com/2014/03/06/crowdsourced-storytelling-how-can-you-make-the-most-of-user-generated-content/feed/1Ask the Audience: What’s the Best Super Bowl Ad from the Last 5 Years? [STUDY]http://latd.com/2014/02/13/ask-the-audience-which-is-the-best-super-bowl-ad-from-the-last-5-years-study/
http://latd.com/2014/02/13/ask-the-audience-which-is-the-best-super-bowl-ad-from-the-last-5-years-study/#commentsThu, 13 Feb 2014 22:42:37 +0000Steve Mushkinhttp://latd.com/?p=11856Continue reading →]]>Every year, the Super Bowl offers up the best of the best in advertising—but which ads are most lovable, and why? These are the questions we set out to answer when we kicked off our Super Bowl Great Ad Playoffs last week.

We picked twenty of the most noteworthy Super Bowl ads from the last five years (according to a mix of sources), then asked hundreds of viewers to narrow it down to just one winner through a series of match-ups that imitate the NFL Playoff format. Viewers watched the ads in our video evaluation suite, Lumière™, assigning ratings and comments to the ads as a whole as well as to specific features of the ads. Ultimately, three metrics were used to determine the winning ads: overall enjoyment, memorability and shareability.

This week, the four best ads from 2010-2013 went up against the four best ads from 2014 (as determined by a review of multiple sources). The winning ad from all five years was Budweiser’s “Puppy Love.” Check out the graphic below to see the results.

Our participants were U.S. residents with at least some interest in the Super Bowl, ages 18-54 with an equal gender split. A minimum of 150 people participated in each head-to-head matchup.

(To view the ads referred to in this graphic, see the links at the bottom of the page.)

Budweiser’s “Puppy Love” ad was the winner of our playoffs and the focus of much attention this year. It uses some classic techniques to great effect. Here are a few:

Story: The ad uses editing deftly to create movement in time. Without relying on any of the traditional choices (e.g., dissolves or fades) and instead with simple cuts, several smooth ellipses are created. These allow for the idea of separation and return to play out in a more satisfying way in the narrative, over a brief but meaningful time period.

Framing: The alternation of close-ups, medium shots, and longer shots is natural and consistent. The mix allows for intimacy and personality to come through in the close-ups, relationships in the medium shots, and broader perspective on the story in the long shots.

Emotional restraint: Although the ad is designed to go straight for the heart, it does so in a surprisingly understated way that delivers a stronger overall effect. No close-ups are held too long; the humans’ attraction is clear but not overdone; and the final shot from above does a great job of bringing all the relationships together without trying too hard. There’s no explicit message (aside from that mirrored through the lyrics), and the viewer is allowed to enjoy the union and reunion without obvious interference.

How did the other contenders fare?

Certain ads that may have been eliminated early because they came up against a strong competitor still performed well overall—so it’s worth taking a closer look at the overall enjoyment scores for all contenders. Two such ads include Snickers’ “Betty White” and Volkswagen’s “The Force.” (Keep in mind that memorability and shareability were also used to determine the winners—see the infographic below for the breakdown of all three metrics.)

In the coming weeks, we’ll be presenting more thorough insights on why particular ads did so well—including best practices and an analysis of the most effective creative techniques to share with agencies, marketers and video content creators.

Lumière is a cloud application that helps video creators gather rich audience feedback on their content—whether programs or films, ads, promos, or trailers—through interactive screenings, and analyze that feedback simply and powerfully through dynamic data visualizations. Learn more about what Lumière is and see some possible uses, and if you’d like to try it for yourself, join our beta!

Lumière is a product of Latitude Labs, a subsidiary of Latitude Research.

]]>http://latd.com/2014/02/13/ask-the-audience-which-is-the-best-super-bowl-ad-from-the-last-5-years-study/feed/2The Super Bowl Ad Playoffs: What Do the Best of the Best Have in Common? [STUDY]http://latd.com/2014/02/04/the-super-bowl-ad-playoffs-what-do-the-best-of-the-best-have-in-common/
http://latd.com/2014/02/04/the-super-bowl-ad-playoffs-what-do-the-best-of-the-best-have-in-common/#commentsTue, 04 Feb 2014 23:11:03 +0000Neil Basuhttp://latd.com/?p=11804Continue reading →]]>While the NFL Playoffs and the Super Bowl are behind us now, we’re revving up another type of championship with our Super Bowl Great Ad Playoffs which features 20 of the best Super Bowl ads from the past 5 years. We’re leaving it up to the people to decide—asking a diverse group of viewers to evaluate the contenders in our video evaluation suite, Lumière™, by assigning ratings and comments to the ads as a whole as well as to specific features of the ads. As researchers, our goal is to understand not only which ads are great, but why they’re great—shedding light on best practices for brands, agencies and content creators.

Screenshot of data via the Lumiere application

The Ad Playoffs: Round 1

Last week, we faced-off the top 5 ads each year from 2010-2013. These ads were chosen by reviewing multiple sources (including superbowl-ads.com) for consensus about which truly stood out from the pack. Individual match-ups were randomized by year. Winners were determined by how they fared across three key metrics:

Overall enjoyment

Memorability

Shareability

Our participants were 300 U.S. residents with at least some Super Bowl interest, ages 18-54 with an equal gender split.

Here’s how the contenders fared:

(To view the ads referred to in this graphic, see the links at the bottom of the page.)

Select Takeaways from Round 1: What Worked, What Didn’t

Products should either solve problems or create them. Competition or tension between two sides, either resolved or exacerbated by the product, was a theme common amongst all winners from this round. (For example, Snickers soothes while Doritos escalates the tension.)

Be explicit—and be remembered. When it came to making a lasting impression, focused messages almost always won out. That doesn’t mean advertisements need to go light on creativity; it just means they need to make sure the point comes through loud and clear. (For example, KIA’s “Puppet Joyride” is just that, and it ultimately backseats the brand’s message.)

Not all humor is created equal. Ads that tended to do well leveraged a specific brand of humor—and it wasn’t necessarily brainy, or based on pop culture, or of the bathroom variety. This brand of humor relied on simple scenarios where a character’s behavior was exaggerated or ironic. (For example, in Doritos’ “Play Nice,” a small child warns his mother’s suitor to keep his hands to himself; and in Coca-Cola’s “Border,” two border patrol officers on opposing sides abandon their angst to share a coke.)

Funny doesn’t always come in first. There’s no doubt that humor tends to be a crowd-pleaser, but what about going other routes? Good storytelling that resonates on an emotional level can conquer comedy. (For example, Budweiser’s “Clydesdales” ad performed the best out of all the contenders in this round—and did so with a heart-warming, easy-to-follow narrative.)

In the coming days and weeks, we’ll be posting results from the quarter-finals, the semi-finals, and the championship to determine the winner of the past half-decade. We’ll also be providing more in-depth insight into the psychology behind ad preferences and the most effective creative elements.

Next, this round’s winners will face off against the best Super Bowl ads from 2014:

Lumière is a cloud application that helps video creators gather rich audience feedback on their content—whether programs or films, ads, promos, or trailers—through interactive screenings, and analyze that feedback simply and powerfully through dynamic data visualizations. Learn more about what Lumière is and see some possible uses, and if you’d like to try it for yourself, join our beta!

Lumière is a product of Latitude Labs, a subsidiary of Latitude Research.

Many of us go about our lives constantly surrounded by screens, immersed in various “stories”: movies, TV shows, books, plot-driven video games, news articles, advertising, and more. Whether we realize it or not, we’re creating new behaviors, routines, mindsets, and expectations around the content we consume—which in turn presents new challenges and opportunities for content creators and marketers. In other words, while the fundamentals of good storytelling remain the same, technology is changing how stories could be told in the future—across platforms and beyond. But what does that mean exactly?

From 2012-2013, Latitude, a strategic insights consultancy, has been conducting an ongoing Future of Storytelling initiative to understand what audiences want for the long haul. Below are 8 predictions for the future of storytelling based on what we found. (More information about Latitude’s multi-phase research project is available here):

1. Stories will come out of the screen, into the physical world. We’ve seen plenty of cohesive cross-platform narratives, but where can you go from there? The “real world”—that’s where. Thanks to technological advances like augmented reality and The Internet of Things, projects like Google’s Ingress are beginning to suggest that we should treat the actual world as another platform. We expect to see stories increasingly connected to physical spaces, from MMO games played out across a city to live action events to retail experiences.

2. Characters will become connections. As our own social relationships play out more over digital mediums (like Facebook) and technology enables characters to live beyond the screen, people will be able to interact with these characters organically in places once reserved for only fan interaction. Maybe some crazy AI program will enable this, or maybe it’s just a matter of writers or actors maintaining online identities for their characters. Either way—would you rather talk to your friend about James Bond’s mission, or talk to Bond himself?

3. Audiences will be able to experience stories unfolding from different vantage points. The analog version of this might be the 90′s film Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, which follows the exploits of two minor characters in Hamlet, retelling Shakespeare’s masterpiece from a wildly different point-of-view. In the future, audiences will be able to experience stories through a particular character’s eyes—and perhaps have the ability to switch between characters at will.

4. Stories will be told 24/7. As we develop deeper relationships and greater interactivity with characters, it’s only natural to think of them as having lives of their own—lives that exist in some parallel universe, and go on even when we’re not tuning in. We may receive text messages or alerts when something significant has happened during the course of a character’s day, or we may get “breaking news” alerts pushed to our smartphones when an important battle has been won.

5. The notion of authorship will evolve; in many cases, storytelling will be more of a “bottom-up” process. People have been putting their own content on the web forever, but new business models have been slow to evolve and big studios and production companies are just beginning to take audience participation seriously—such as with Syfy’s hybrid game/TV show, Defiance. Content creators will continue to find elegant ways to incorporate audience ideas and participation into professional-quality content, and they’ll do it in something close to real-time.

6. Stories will make the world a better place (even more than they already do). As stories extend further into the real world, so will their potential to create positive change for both individuals and society, which might mean living a healthier life, supporting important causes, or something else. More narratives will be designed to drive social action in more engaging ways—encouraging audience members to become active collaborators not just in narratives, but in the real world issues behind them.

7. Videos will offer one-click storefronts. The days of scouring the web to figure out where you can buy your favorite TV character’s awesome outfit are over. Thanks to real-time apps, brands are synching up the “Buy now” button with your favorite content—giving an entirely new meaning to contextual relevance. It also begs the question, “Could second screens be more effective at driving commerce than primary screens?”

8. Passive or active narrative experience? It’ll be your choice. There a ton of cool new possibilities for storytelling, but there are also different kinds of audiences with different desires. (To learn more about audience types, download The Future of Storytelling report.) In the future, audiences will be able to choose their desired “tier” of interactivity—from completely passive to wildly active—before engaging with a story. That could mean the difference between merely observing as an onlooker (as with more traditional story experiences) to becoming a minor character to becoming the main character. Of course, this will require that storytellers have a good sense of their audiences so they can determine what’s too much or too little for different groups.

Kim Gaskins is the Director of Content Development for Latitude, a strategic insights consultancy helping the world’s foremost media, technology and advertising companies better understand and engage their audiences.

]]>http://latd.com/2013/10/25/8-predictions-for-the-future-of-storytelling/feed/5Illustration Gallery: Next-Gen Storytelling Conceptshttp://latd.com/2013/08/26/future-of-storytelling-project-concepts/
http://latd.com/2013/08/26/future-of-storytelling-project-concepts/#commentsMon, 26 Aug 2013 22:11:51 +0000Kim Gaskinshttp://latd.com/?p=11598Continue reading →]]>As part of our ongoing Future of Storytelling initiative, we asked 158 early adopters from around the world: “How would you like to experience stories in the future?” They came up with everything from digitally “friending” a character to punctuating traditional novels with local, live action scenes. We illustrated some of their most interesting ideas below:

Next, we took some of these forward-thinking ideas to broader audiences—1,107 people in Brazil, the United Kingdom and the United States—and here’s what we found:

78% want to “friend” a character digitally (e.g., receive Facebook updates, text messages, etc.), with the ability to sway the character’s decisions—just as with a real friend.

87% want to see events through the eyes of a particular character or to switch between different characters’ points-of-view.

85% are interested to join up with other fans around a story (or a story’s message) they’re passionate about in order to raise or donate money, or spread the word about a good cause.

89% want to get more information about specific objects or events in the narrative (e.g., read a letter mentioned in passing or hear the details of a conversation that was glossed over in the story, etc.).

73% are interested in discovering real-world products or services at relevant points in a story.

Our approach to cross-platform advertising effectiveness goes beyond simply demonstrating lift across traditional brand metrics. We tell a comprehensive story about why and how multiple platforms play complementary roles in driving engagement with sponsored content and in generating brand impact. (How does 1+1=3?) Our studies often include creative, qualitative elements to complement quantitative findings for a truly 360° perspective.

Additionally, we showcase the value of our clients’ brands and content, helping them to deepen relationships with agencies and brand partners. How? We go beyond just numbers that demonstrate a campaign’s power by providing strategic insight about which elements of the campaign worked, which didn’t, and why.

With an emphasis on digital, mobile and social platforms, we assess dimensions including:

Advertising & brand awareness

Behavioral impact (e.g., purchase intent, etc.)

Cross-platform campaign content reactions

Individual platform engagement & roles

Performance by demographic & target audience groups

Sponsorship fit with environment

Where we measure

Our cross-platform campaign studies can assess the effectiveness of marketing efforts across a variety of platforms, including:

TV (traditional ad spots, in-show integrations, & promos)

Mobile websites & apps for smartphones and tablets

Online (static & interactive display, video players, & games)

Social media (Facebook games & apps/widgets)

Radio

Print

Who & how we measure

We have considerable expertise gauging cross-platform campaign effectiveness for end clients in industries including: auto, QSR, entertainment, healthy and beauty, and CPG.

We have a successful track record with studies that require participants to download second screen apps, including third party apps (e.g., Zeebox) and network- or show-specific apps.

We offer rich, multimedia environments for creative testing, with the ability to evaluate static and dynamic banners, sponsored games, and various types of video content, using both structured and open-ended questions.

]]>http://latd.com/2013/08/06/latitudes-signature-360-campaign-effectiveness-offering-overview/feed/0Presentation Slides: Latitude & Bravo Deconstruct the Multi-Screener at the ARF’s Re:Think Plushttp://latd.com/2013/05/30/presentation-slides-latitude-bravo-deconstruct-the-multi-screener-at-the-arfs-rethink-plus/
http://latd.com/2013/05/30/presentation-slides-latitude-bravo-deconstruct-the-multi-screener-at-the-arfs-rethink-plus/#commentsThu, 30 May 2013 18:47:22 +0000Kadley Gosselinhttp://latd.com/?p=11385Continue reading →]]>Last month, Latitude’s EVP, Neela Sakaria, joined Dave Kaplan, VP of Ad Sales and Digital Research at Bravo, to share findings from Deconstructing the Multi-Screener, a multi-phase thought leader study we recently completed for Bravo. The research was designed to help marketers navigate today’s increasingly multi-screen world. Read more about the study in the press release, and check out the presentation slides below:

Measure the incremental value of adding multiple screens to a cross-platform campaign

Latitude’s approach to illuminating the value of individual platforms goes beyond simply measuring the impact on brand metrics; it defines the role of each platform in the context of the overall campaign through qualitative/quantitative hybrid techniques and user experience-oriented research methods.

3 Insights from Latitude

Traditional media still matters. While digital certainly does drive engagement, TV and print still have an important role in cross-platform campaigns—especially insofar as they provide a sense of “cohesiveness” to campaigns that rely on digital screens as well. In these cases, TV & print ads give audiences a conceptual “jumping off” point for experiencing a brand’s overall cross-platform campaign.

For digital/mobile, 1+1=3. Incremental value derived from combining digital/mobile with TV is not just “additive”: when the audience is exposed across all screens, the impact on brand metrics is often amplified beyond what would be expected from a normal increase in brand exposure.

Get personal with mobile. Mobile is more than just an add-on. Mobile has unique strengths—it’s the most personal of all devices, and can add in-the-moment relevance to large and small campaigns. When a campaign involves driving people across platforms for more information (e.g., from TV to mobile/online), the content that users are being directed to has to offer more than just information about the brand; it should create meaningful experiences, functional value, or entertaining content—largely through being personalized—that provide a “service” to potential consumers.

Andy Wiltshire is Lead Strategist at Latitude. He heads up Latitude’s quantitative research, data management, and metrics development teams. Andy also specializes in cross-media campaign studies, in which he helps to provide clients with strategic direction around advertising and multi-platform campaign effectiveness—he has worked extensively with clients like MTV Networks and ESPN. Andy is also interested in digital connectedness around interactions with natural environments & sports media.

]]>http://latd.com/2013/04/02/the-value-of-360-campaign-measurement-3-key-insights/feed/0TeleVisionary Series #1: The Social Tipping Pointhttp://latd.com/2013/03/12/televisionary-finding-the-social-tipping-point/
http://latd.com/2013/03/12/televisionary-finding-the-social-tipping-point/#commentsTue, 12 Mar 2013 19:26:05 +0000Neil Basuhttp://latd.com/?p=11033Continue reading →]]>Over the course of 2013, we’ll be conducting an ongoing investigation of some of the most important—and interesting—questions shaping the future of video today. The TeleVisionary series will look beyond just TV content to include the entire video universe, such as other forms of video content, the impact of different devices or “screens” on viewing attitudes and behaviors, and more.

Installment #1: The Social Tipping Point

How many people (and who) in your personal network need to be watching a particular show before you’ll also start watching it?

We envision a “social tipping point,” an improved social metric that gauges when and how people are susceptible to social influence around TV shows. To dig deeper, we’ll be kicking off a study that examines TV viewing behavior through the lens of human relationships. The study will provide insights for marketers, including how to identify which content is “spreadable,” and how to cater to audiences that are more receptive to social influence or particularly influential themselves.

We’re planning an immersive, real world experiment:

Tap into two real world social networks: a group of co-workers and a set of students living in a college dormitory.

Conduct in-depth interviews with individuals in these networks, exploring the strength of their relationships with others, their viewing preferences and behaviors, motivations for viewing, and more.

With a brief post-survey, collect psychographic and demographic information, as well as social media usage, sharing tendencies, etc.

Visualize the networks based on TV viewing behavior and strength of social connections.

Compare the attributes of these networks to those in randomly generated networks (i.e., “control” groups) in order to identify how the number and quality of relationships affects TV selection and viewing.

Track these networks over time to gauge how TV selection and viewing spread.

Specifically, our objectives will be:

To determine the existence and nature of a “social tipping point.” (How might the number and quality of relationships explain TV selection and viewing behaviors?)

To both visualize and explain the spread of TV viewing behaviors through a social network over time. (Does one’s influence take effect quickly or slowly? Does it amplify or diminish?)

To reveal qualitative insights about the people and TV shows involved. (Which kinds of people do the influencing? Which allow themselves to be influenced? Does it vary by show type?)

Why ARE We Doing This?

Everyone now knows that social media is important when it comes to the success of TV shows. The old metrics are not telling the whole story anymore about which types of content are holding people’s attention because “time-shifted” viewing (e.g., on Netflix, iTunes, network websites, etc.) isn’t being captured by traditional ratings. Companies like Nielsen continue to place their emphasis on the “live” quality of TV viewing without tracking viewing activity that may occur months after an air date.

Social media offers a more holistic picture of viewers’ engagement. TV shows are hot topics of conversation, a common social lubricant amongst friends and strangers alike. As such, companies are turning to social media for answers because it consists of networks that can be documented. But even when media companies are in sync with what their viewers are saying, the same question remains: what precisely about this buzz is important?

Specifically, we are still no closer to understanding how much of this buzz will yield a desired outcome (e.g. winning over another TV viewer, engaging with a show on a deeper level, etc.). Is it the amount of buzz that is important, or does it matter from whom this buzz comes: a close friend, acquaintance, or mere stranger?

Taking it to the Next Level

It can be frustrating to chase around the answers to these questions. But our research design is advantageous in that it tracks both networks and viewing behavior. Rather than simply data-mining, we will use representative social networks in the real world. By moving data collection one step further toward reality, we will be able to track behaviors that take place offline and may have gone undocumented online (such as choosing to watch or not watch a TV show). In addition, our willingness to incorporate social network theory into our analyses ensures that our story will be crafted with high quality tools.

Over the next few months, we hope you will follow along with our ongoing investigation of the “social tipping point.”

If you’d like to suggest a question or topic for Latitude to explore as part of its TeleVisionary series, please email it to life-connected@latd.com.